Dismissed¶112

Smt Lavanya Ganesh Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Apr 2026WA/777/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay - 585 days - reasons not sufficient and not bona fide - writ appeal dismissed; BBMP Councillor challenges Single Judge directions on cessation/disqualification of Councillors under Section 19 and section 432, Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976; quo warranto writ by Anil Kumar Shetty K.; Karnataka High Court Act Section 4; bench D K Singh and T.M. Nadaf JJ.

What did the court decide?

None; the application for condonation of delay (I.A.No.1/2026) and the writ appeal were dismissed, and pending IAs stand disposed of. ¶112

Smt Lavanya Ganesh Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the application for condonation of delay (I.A.No.1/2026) and the writ appeal were dismissed, and pending IAs stand disposed of.

¶112

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 585 days in filing the writ appeal should be condoned (I.A.No.1/2026). +1 more

¶102

Court's answer

Application I.A.No.1/2026 seeking condonation of delay is dismissed and, consequently, the writ appeal stands dismissed.

¶112

Ratio / Principle

Apart from stating that the appellant had to collect documents and had a good case on merits, nothing was stated in the condonation application explaining the inordinate delay of 585 days; the reasons were therefore not sufficient and not bona fide.

¶112

Key takeaways

In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocatory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of.ratio¶116

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court, Division Bench (D K Singh and T.M. Nadaf, JJ.; judgment per D K Singh, J.), WA No. 777 of 2026 (LB-RES), decided 23.04.2026: Writ appeal by Smt. Lavanya Ganesh Reddy, an elected BBMP Councillor who was respondent No.7 in W.P.No.16099/2019, against the learned Single Judge's order dated 22.06.2024 whereby the quo warranto writ petition of Anil Kumar Shetty K. (seeking cessation of office of Councillors who failed to declare assets under Section 19 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976) was disposed of with directions to initiate action against Councillors acting contrary to section 432 of the 1976 Act, to constitute disciplinary inquiry against Commissioners who failed to refer cessation/disqualification under section 19(3), and to file a compliance report within three months. The appeal was filed with a delay of 585 days; the Division Bench dismissed I.A.No.1/2026 for condonation of delay, holding that apart from asserting a good case on merits and the need to collect documents and obtain a certified copy, nothing was stated to explain the inordinate delay and the reasons were neither sufficient nor bona fide; consequently the appeal was dismissed and pending applications stood disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 777 OF 2026 (LB-RES)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SMT. LAVANYA GANESH REDDY, W/O GANESH REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.795, 10^TH MAIN ROAD, 3^RD BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 043.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED RASEEL T.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUNIL KUMAR H., ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO.434, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶17

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE - 560 002,

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

HC-KAR

REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER.

REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, 2^ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR, KH ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶24

MR. ANIL KUMAR SHETTY K., S/O KUSHAL SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 161, 3^RD CROSS, 17^TH B MAIN, J.P. NAGAR 2^ND PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 076.

¶25

UMADEVI NAGARAJ, RESIDING AT NO. 673/1, 1^ST FLOOR, BEHIND JAIN TEMPLE, T DASARA HALLI, BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶26

M. PADMAVATHI SRINIVAS, RESIDING AT NO. 246, BIRESHWARA NILAYA, BAKTHA KANAKADASA ROAD, NEAR SHIVA TEMPLE, KALKERE, BENGALURU - 560 043.

¶27

KODANDA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO. 642, 10^TH B MAIN ROAD, DODDABANASWADI, BANGALORE - 560 043.

¶28

MEENAKSHI, RESIDING AT NO. 235/1, KRISHNA KUTIRA, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, 3^RD BLOCK,

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

KRISHNAIYANAPALAYA, BENGALURU - 560 038.

¶33

RAJA S (BANDERAJ), RESIDING AT NO. 1, SHREE RAM ROAD, IN FRONT OF APNA BAZAAR, VININAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 016.

¶34

V SHIVAPRAKASH, RESIDING AT NO. 66/62, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 2^ND STAGE, OKALIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 021.

¶35

BALAKRISHNAN G, RESIDING AT NO. 85, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, LR NAGAR, VIVEKNAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 047.

¶36

SARALA C MAHESH BABU, RESIDING AT NO. 16/15, 18^TH CROSS, RAMASWAMY LAYOUT, LAKKASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 030.

¶37

T. RAMACHANDRA, NO.5, 20-A CROSS, EJIPURA MAIN ROAD, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 047.

¶38

MR. M CHANDRAPPA, RESIDING AT NO.88/1, NEAR HANUMAN TEMPLE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095.

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

MR. G. MANJUNATH, RESIDING AT NO. 546, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 1^ST CROSS, 8^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 034.

¶42

ARYA SRINIVAS, RESIDING AT NO. 14/4, ARYA NILAYA, BETTEGOWDA LAYOUT, 1^ST CROSS ROAD, JUDICIAL LAYOUT, TALAGATTAPURA, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 019.

¶43

RAJASHEKARA N. RESIDING AT NO. 88, 1^ST CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, PATEL MUNNIYAPPA LAYOUT, V NAGENAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 032.

¶44

NAUSHEER AHMED, RESIDING AT NO. 102, SHISHA, HERITAGE 9, 4^TH B-MAIN, HRBR LAYOUT, 2^ND BLOCK, KALYANINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043.

¶45

PADMAVATHI NARASIMHAMURTHY, RESIDING AT NO. 235, SRI. KRISHNA NILAYA, 6^TH MAIN, NELAGADHARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 073.

¶46

SHWETHA VIJAYA KUMAR, RESIDING AT NO. 627,

¶47

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

HOODI GARDEN, THIGALARAPALYA, HOODI, MAHADEVAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 048.

¶50

MAHALAKSHMI H RAVINDRA, RESIDING AT NO. 151, 2^ND MAIN, VIDHYARANYA NAGAR, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶51

MAMATA K.M., RESIDING AT NO. 311, SHABARI NAGARA, RK HEGDE NAGARA, DR. SHIVARAMAKARANTA NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 077.

¶52

M. VELUNAYAKAR, RESIDING AT NO. 594, 9^TH CROSS, GOKULA 1^ST STAGE, 2^ND PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 054.

¶53

B N JAYAPRAKASH, RESIDING AT NO. 136/1, COCONUT GARDEN, SEEGEHALLI, VIRGONAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 049.

¶54

M N SHRIKANT (PUTTA), RESIDING AT NO. 208, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD ROAD, B. NARAYANAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 016.

¶55

G. MOHAN KUMAR, RESIDING AT NO. 35/36, USHA NILAYA,

¶56

¶57

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

GANGAMMA GARDEN, MALLAGALU MAIN ROAD, 2^ND STAGE, NAGARBHAVI, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU - 560 091.

¶60

RAMESH N. RESIDING AT NO. 761/2, 93/7, RING ROAD, MARATHAHALLI, MARATHAHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 037.

¶61

FARIDA ISHTIAQ, RESIDING AT NO. 10/A, NOHA STREET, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 051.

¶62

BALAKRISHNAPPA G, RESIDING AT NO. 85, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, LR NAGAR, VIVEKNAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 047.

¶63

MR. R.V. YUVARAJ, RESIDING AT NO. 50, C STREET, FORT ROAD, KALASIPALYA, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶64

D. PRAMOD, RESIDING AT NO.351, BALAJI COMPLEX, BAZAR STREET, KUVEMPU ROAD, KENGERI, BENGALURU - 560 060.

¶65

GAYATRI M, RESIDING AT NO. 34/1,

¶66

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

8^TH CROSS, KP AGRAHARA, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶69

MR. AJMAL BAIG, RESIDING AT NO. 4, 6^TH CROSS, SHAMANNA GARDEN, BENGALURU - 560 026.

¶70

G. MANJUNATH, 546, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 1^ST CROSS, 8^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 034.

¶71

MR. N. NAGARAJU, RESIDING AT NO. 793, 31^ST CROSS, THILAK NAGAR, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 041.

¶72

MR. ANSAR PASHA S, RESIDING AT NO. 382, 6^TH CROSS, KAVERI NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 070.

¶73

…RESPONDENTS

¶74

(BY SRI. M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1 & R3)

¶75

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No.16099/2019 DATED 22.06.2024.

¶76

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶77

¶78

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶79

HC-KAR

¶80

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶81

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶82

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶83

1. The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 22.06.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.16099/2019.

¶84

2. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by one Anil Kumar Shetty .K, claiming to be "a social entrepreneur and diligent citizen of Karnataka", with the following prayers:-

¶85

"A) Issue a writ in the nature of Quo Warranto against the Respondent Nos.4 to 37 and require them to show what authority they have to continue to hold office as Councillors of BBMP in the wake of their failure to comply with the provisions of Section 19 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976.

¶86

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

B) Alternatively, issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to consider the Petitioner's representations at Annexures 'F' and 'J' and take necessary action as prescribed by Section 19(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, in an expeditious manner and without any further delay."

¶89

3. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

¶90

4. The respondent Nos.4 to 37 were elected as the Councillors of the respondent No.2-Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition was that the Councillorship of the said private respondents ceased on its own in terms of Section 19 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1976') as they had failed to declare all

¶91

the assets owned by them and any members of their family. Alternatively, it was prayed that the petitioner's representations

¶92

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶93

HC-KAR

¶94

dated 10.03.2018 and 19.02.2019 should be considered, wherein he had requested to immediately disqualify all the Councillors considering violation of the provisions of the Act of 1976.

¶95

5. The learned Single Judge, vide impugned judgment and order, has disposed of the said writ petition with the following directions:-

¶96

"[i] The respondent-Corporation is directed to initiate legal action against disqualified Councillors who have voted & acted in contravention of the provisions of section 432 of the 1976 Act, forthwith, after accomplishing the necessary prerequisites & formalities.

¶97

[ii] The respondent-government is directed to take all steps for constituting disciplinary inquiry against such of the Commissioners of respondent-Corporation who failed to refer the question of cessation/disqualification of Councillors in terms of section 19(3) and further,

¶98

11 - NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶99

HC-KAR

¶100

allowed them to function as such in violation of section 432 of the 1976 Act.

¶101

[iii] The compliance report in terms of [i] & [ii] above shall be filed with the Registrar General of this Court, within an outer limit of three months."

¶102

6. The appellant (respondent No.7 in the writ petition), who is one of the elected Councillor, has filed the present appeal. The appeal has been filed with a delay of 585 days. The reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the applicationI.A.No.1/2026 filed for condonation of delay are as under:

¶103

"1. I state that I am the Appellant in the above appeal and I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence I am swearing to this affidavit.

¶104

2. I state that I am challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.16099/2019 dated 26/04/2024.

¶105

3. I state that I have good case on merits and the averments made in the main appeal may read as part and

¶106

12 -

¶107

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶108

HC-KAR

¶109

parcel of this Application provides the petition of facts.

¶110

4. I state that there is a delay of 585 days in filing the present appeal as I had to collect all the documents and apply for the certified copy of the judgement and collect from my advocate and arrange for the fees to file the present appeal. Hence there is a delay.

¶111

5. I state that the delay is bona fide and not intentional. If the delay is not condoned, I will be put to great hardship and agony."

¶112

7. Except for saying that the appellant had to collect all the documents and he has good case on merits, nothing has been stated in the application for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. We find that the reasons are not sufficient and bona fide . Therefore, we dismiss the application-I.A.No.1/2026 and consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed.

¶113

13 -

¶114

NC: 2026:KHC:22370-DB WA No. 777 of 2026

¶115

HC-KAR

¶116

In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending IAs, if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they stand

¶117

disposed of.

¶118

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶119

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

¶120

RR/BKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7 ct-vn

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and order dated 22.06.2024 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.16099/2019, disposing of the quo warranto writ petition with directions to the Corporation and the Government (legal action against Councillors acting contrary to section 432 of the 1976 Act; disciplinary inquiry against Commissioners who failed to refer cessation/disqualification under section 19(3); compliance report to the Registrar General within three months).¶83
Learned Single Judge, High Court of Karnataka · 22.06.2024
Prior proceeding
Writ petition W.P.No.16099/2019 filed by Anil Kumar Shetty K. seeking a writ of quo warranto against Respondent Nos. 4 to 37 (BBMP Councillors) for failure to comply with Section 19 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, and, alternatively, mandamus to act on his representations under Section 19(2).¶85
Prior proceeding
Writ petitioner's representations dated 10.03.2018 and 19.02.2019 requesting immediate disqualification of all Councillors for violation of the provisions of the Act of 1976.¶94
Prior proceeding
Learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with three directions: initiation of legal action against disqualified Councillors who voted/acted contrary to section 432; disciplinary inquiry against Commissioners who failed to refer cessation/disqualification under section 19(3); and a compliance report to the Registrar General within three months.¶95
Prior proceeding
The appellant, respondent No.7 in the writ petition and an elected Councillor, filed the present writ appeal with a delay of 585 days, supported by I.A.No.1/2026 seeking condonation of delay.¶102
Prior proceeding
Affidavit supporting condonation attributed the delay to collecting documents, obtaining a certified copy of the judgment and arranging fees, and asserted the delay was bona fide and not intentional.¶110
Prior proceeding
Division Bench found the reasons for the inordinate delay not sufficient and not bona fide, dismissed I.A.No.1/2026 and, consequently, the appeal itself; pending IAs were disposed of.¶112

Smt Lavanya Ganesh Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Lavanya Ganesh Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Karnataka Vs Shanthamma

Sri H K Jayanna Vs Manohar

Sri C Ashwathaiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Siddagangaiah Vs Sri. G. Kempaiah

The Bangalore Development Authority Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Srinivasa Reddy v Vs the Tahashildhar